whats the difference - 60Hz or 120Hz LCD TV

[Kevin Gregoire]

im looking to get a new tv and since flat screens are about the only thing sold anymore i want to know which
is better and what the difference is in some?

i know plasma is an energy hog and not worth buying.

so im left with LCD, and i know 120Hz is the best but how much better is it over 60Hz?
prices keep coming down but i can get a good sized 60Hz for same price as a smaller
120Hz.

those that have experience please let me know your thoughts?

[Myk Rian]

120 hz shows movement better, since the refresh is faster.

[Matt Meiser]

But go look in the store. I had in mind that I HAD to get a 120Hz. I came home with a 60Hz because after going back and forth about 100 times the TV I thought looked the best happened to be 60.

[David Epperson]

The human eye will see 20hz as being "realtime", a 60 hz set refreshes every other line in the video in one pass and then the others so the entire picture is refreshed at about 30hz - which is still 150% better than the eye can detect. 120 hz is a sales gimmick to get more $$$ for something undetectably "better". If it's "better" but you can't tell it - is it really worth the extra $$$? Not for me.

[Jason Roehl]

Not quite right, David. Since he's talking about an LCD set, it will refresh the whole picture 60 times per second--LCD TVs are either 720p or 1080p. The "p" stands for "progressive", and even if the TV is receiving a lower frame rate, the TV will upconvert by interpolation. A 1080i TV (older HD rear-projection sets) uses interlacing as you described, where every other line is updated with each frame.

Now, whether or not one can see the difference is a whole different debate. I have not looked at the differences in 60Hz, 120Hz and 240Hz TVs, so I can't say which I prefer.

[Cyrus Brewster 7]

I have been able to see the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz - mainly in high action sequences in movies. I have heard the same is true for video games. For regular viewing you will be hard pressed to see the difference. Move up to 240Hz, though, and you will most likely be paying extra for a number only.

I have a 60Hz and have no problems with it - 120Hz was not available when I purchased it. I will only move up when my current set dies. Actually, I am not sure if 60Hz is still available.

[David Hawxhurst]

for the most part you'll generally not see to much of difference between refresh rates but there is a difference. if you watch a lot of high speed action type sports or shows you'll notice less blurring with the higher refresh rates. also the size of the tv will have some effect. you may not notice the blurring on smaller say 40" range while it maybe very noticeable on something much larger like 60 plus inches. some will never seen the difference while others will see the difference. you will have to look at them and decide for you self which works for your eyes. get your self a dvd that has the actions you'll be watching and take it with you to your local hifi (home theater) store and play it on different tv's to find the one you like the best. i personally avoid the chains (best buy, hh greg, etc) and favor the smaller shops as they know the products better and the prices are competitive sometimes cheaper. the customer service is much better and the after sales support is also much better.

[John Coloccia]

It's not a sales gimmick. It 120Hz is there to eliminate judder, which comes about because of how video recorded at one rate must be crammed into 60Hz somehow. Unless 60Hz is a multiple of the rate (and 24 doesn't go into 60) the frames will have to be mucked with in order to get them to fit. This causes herky jerky motion, clearly visible when the camera pans.

24 goes into 120, so 120Hz TVs experience no judder.



This isn't exactly the same thing, but it's an excellent demonstration of exactly what judder is. Once you see it you'll say, "Ohhhh....THAT'S judder", because we all see it and have just gotten accustomed to it.

[Jason Roehl]

Now you've ruined me, John. The one on the left drove me nuts.

[John Coloccia]

The judder isn't quite so bad going from 24 to 60 as it was in the clips I posted (the only ones I could find that demonstrated it), but yeah....it's hard to not notice it once someone points it out. LOL. Sorry

[Greg Peterson]

I drove myself crazy researching all the different technologies and came to realize that no one technology was superior to another one. It all came down to what I was going to view and where I was going to view it.

Edge lit LED LCD versus local dimming LED LCD, 60,120,240 Hz, plasma, DLP...

No one set is going to be everything. Find one that fits the largest number of your criteria.

I received an extraordinary deal on a Mitsubishi DLP set that I could not refuse. I would have had to pay twice the price to get anywhere near the size and quality of picture in LCD.

[Joe Angrisani]

Forget the mumbo jumbo. BUY WITH YOUR EYES, not the spec sheet.

[Kevin Gregoire]

Forget the mumbo jumbo. BUY WITH YOUR EYES, not the spec sheet.

haha, now thats a pretty damn good way of putting it!

[Ryan Mooney]

With old monitors (cathode ray) I would avoid 60hz like the plague because its the same phase as electricity and would be always slightly off sync with the lights (magnetic ballast lights pulse slightly with the incoming current - normally this isn't visible but when you're staring at a monitor for 8 hours a day it will give you a blinding headache). Interestingly I don't have that problem with LCD (or LED) because it refreshes differently (its not a single ray but it interpolates).

Almost totally irrelevant to the OP although it does illustrate one minor problem with buying with your eyes.. that requires you to preview the screen in the same environment you'll be watching it in and the ambient light (fluorescent, incandescent, sunlight, etc..) all make a big difference in the perception of what looks good.

[Belinda Barfield]

Forget the mumbo jumbo. BUY WITH YOUR EYES, not the spec sheet.

A friend who works at Best Buy told me that they monkey with the settings on the TVs so that the ones appearing to have the best picture and sound are the ones with the largest profit margin for them. Anyone else ever heard this, or know if it is true? We're in the market for a new TV (well, the SO is, I'm not) and I'm not sure how to choose one. Maybe I should check Consumer Reports.